get_airport_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Get basic metadata' but does not specify what fields are returned, any performance characteristics, or error conditions. The description is too brief to inform safe invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence of 11 words with no fluff. However, it could be slightly improved by hinting at the output, but overall conciseness is well-maintained.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema, the description should clarify what 'basic metadata' includes. It is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior, especially alongside sibling tools that may also involve airport data.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the tool description repeats the same information ('by IATA code'). No additional semantic value is added beyond the schema, establishing a baseline score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action (Get) and resource (basic metadata for an airport by IATA code). It distinctively differs from sibling tools like build_booking_link or compare_routes, which handle other travel tasks.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when or when not to use this tool. It does not reference sibling tools or provide context for selection, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.